Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2011  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/dissertationonriOOback 


A 

DISSERTATION      < 

ON    THE 

RIGHT  and  OBLIGATION 

OF    THE 

CIVIL     MAGISTRATE 

TO    TAKE   CARE    OF     THE     INTEREST   OF    RELIGION^" 
AND    PROVIDE   FOR    ITS    SUPPORT; 

IN    WHICH     THE     ARGUMENTS     IN    CONFIRMATION; 

OF  &  AID  RIGHT   AND  OBLIGATION,  BOTH    FROM 

REASON    AND    THE     SACKED    SCRIPTURES, 

ARE    ADDUCED  J 

THE    USUAL   OBJECTIONS   EXAMINED,  -TOGETHER 

WITH    SEVERAL   COROLLARIES    DEDUCED 

FROM    THE    SUBJECT, 


BySIMON    BACKUS,  a,^ 


Middle  town  : 
PRINTED  BY  T.  &  J.  B.  DUNNING. 

1804. 

\Cofy  Right  fecund  according  to  Ail  of  Congrcft^ 


INTRODUCTION. 

THE  propenfty  of  human  nature  to  vibrate  from  one 
extreme  to  another,  is  fo  obvious  as  to  become  pro- 
verbial :  which  may  afford  a  clue  whertby  to  account 
for  that  divnjiiy  of  fntmunts  which  prevails  with  re- 
gard to  particular  jztkjtfls  in  dijfercnt  ages  and  peri- 
ods of  time. 

During  the  reign  of  popery,  the  civil  magiflrate  van 
fuppfed  not  only  bound  by  virtue  of  his  office  to  patron- 
ize and  fup poYt  religion  in  genera!,  and  to  make  provi- 
sion for  tht  maintenance  of  the  public  teachers  of  it  ;  bid 
afo  by  the  power  of  the  civil  Jivord,  or  penal  laws,  to 
compel  an  affent  to  fuch  creeds  and  articles  of  faith, 
and  a  conformity  to  fuch  ceremonies  and  modes  of  reli- 
gious worfhip,  as  were  enjoined  by  the  church,  or  the 
pipe  :  and  all  fuch  as  prefnm^d  to  diffent from,  or  r'£- 
fufed  a  conformity  to  fuch  ejlablijhed  flandard  of  faith 
and  wjrfhip,  were,  af'er  conviction  before  an  ecclfiajli- 
cal  tribunal,  to  be  delivered  over  to  the  f  cular  power, 
or  the  civ-.l  magi/Irate,  who  by  a  writ  deheretico  com- 
burendo^  or  for  burning  of  heretics,  was  to  caufe  them 
to  be  publicly  burnt  to  death. 

Nor  was  this  intol  rant  and  perfecuting  fpirit  con- 
fined to  the  ages  in  which  the  papal  fyjlem  prevailed  ; 
particularly  in  England;  but  it  continued  after  the 
commencement  of  the  reformation.  And  during  the 
re/gn  of  Henry  the  VIII.  and  Mary  (who  indetd  was 
a  bigott'd  papifl,)  and  of  Elizabeth,  and  the  feverdl 
branches  or  juccefjions  of  the  houfe  of  Stuart  ;  the  dire 
effttis  of  vhich  were  feverely  felt  by  multitudes,  in  the 
deprivation  of  property ,  liberty  and  life;    and  aiverfi 


IV 


ether  corporal  pains  and  penalties  ;  for  a  mere  non- 
conformity to  ihe  legal  eflablifhmeiit  of  faith  and  worjliip. 

This  p  wer  of  the  civil  magijlrate,  all  protefl  ants  at 
th'  prefent  day  agree  to  explode,  as  irrational,  and  ab- 
furd.  and  to  the  highefl  degree  opprtffive  and  inconfijleni 
with  the  natural  rights  of  mankind.     And  from  a  con- 
viction and  lively  fenfe  of  this  truth,  derived  from  an 
experience  of  the  horrid  and  pernicious  effects  of  a  power 
fo  exorbitant*  the  tranfition  was  very  eafy  to  the  oppfitc 
extreme  ;  or  to  a  denial  of  all  power,  whatfoever,  in  the 
Civil  magrfrate,  with   refpttt  to  matters  of  religion  : 
Not  duty  conjidtring  the  difference  between  power,  and 
the  abufe  and  mifapplication  of  it  ;    or  abfolute  and  un- 
limited power,  and  power  under  due  limitations  and  re- 
flnttions.      This  I  apprehend  is  a  rational  account  of 
the  origin  of  the  d  Urine  maintained  by  many  at  the 
j)refent  day,  viz.   That  the  civil  magi  fir  ate  hath  no  au- 
thority  whatfoever  in  matters  of  religion,    any  further 
than  (as  Dr.  Price  exprefjxth  it)  to  keep  the  peace  :— 
thereby  denying  that  it  is  any  part  of  the  duty  or  office 
of  the  civil  magijlrate  tofupport  religion,  or  to  take  it 
under  his  official  patronage  and  protection.     This  I  con- 
ceive is  the  mofl  rational  account  which  can  be  offigned 
for  the  origin  of  this  doctrine,  fo  far  as  it  is  founded  in 
principle,  or  a  conviction  of  judgment  ;  or  with  refpett 
to  thofe  who  are  honejl  in  their  profefjed  belief  of  it. 

But  it  is  to  be  pre  fumed  that  the  clamors  which  have 
teen  fo  frequent,  and  vehement  of  late  againfl  the  inter- 
ference of  the  civil  magijlrate  in  religious  matters,  and 
the  alarms  of  a  confpiracy  of  church  andflate  in  Con- 
necticut, for  the  fubverfon  of  civil  and  religious  liberty, 
end  the  eJlablifJiment  of  an  ariflocracy  in  the  fate,  and 
hierarchy  in  the  church,  which  with  fo  much  zeal  and 
jffiduity  have  been  propagated  in  pamphlets,  and  in 
certain  new/paper  publications,  proceed  from  a  diffe- 
rent four  ce.  The  manifjl  tendency  of  fuch  productions, 
t^g'ther  with  that  acrimony  and  virulence  which  they 
breathe  towaids.  the  clergy ,  leave  no  room  to  entertain  a 


doubt  with  regard  to  the  principal  ohjttt  their  authors 
have  in  view.  That  under  a  pretended  z?al  for  civil 
and  religious  liberty,  the  prop. ;gaton  offuuh  pr>dutlions 
are  really  exerting  their  utm  Ji  endeavors  to  jubvert  the 
foundations  of  both.  Werz  ihe  authors  of fuch  publica- 
tions actuated  by  an  honefl  zeal  for  the  caufe  of  civil 
and  rdigiou\  liberty,  it  is  hardly  to  be  fipp  fid  that  they 
•would  make  life  oj  fuch  difingenaous  and  finijltr  meant 
to  promote  it.  The  caufe  of  truth  and  righteoufnefs  doth 
nut  require  the  aid  of  fal/Iw  d  and  ntifreprejentationfor 
its  fupport  ;  nor  does  it  derive  any  advantage  there- 
from. Whereas,  every  perfn  of  any  t  lerable  degree  rf 
frnowl.dge  and  information  with  regard  to  the  fu  j  els 
of  thofe  clamor^,  and  hidious  complaints,  which  Jor  a 
number  of  years  pajl  have  been  fo  conflantly  teeming 
from  fundry  pr(ff^  knows  them  to  be  mere  chimeras, 
or  phantoms,  conjured  up  to  frighten  honefl,  thcugh  Itfs 
informed  people,  with  groundlef  imaginations,  that  their 
liberties  are  in  danger ;  with  a  view  to  the  accmplijh- 
ment  of  objects  very  different  fri-m  the  liberties  of  the 
people— viz.  the.  purpofs  of  private  or  perfcnal  ambi- 
tion, and  the  fubverfion  of  that  c  vil  and  religious  order 
which  hath  from  the  beginning  been  eflablpied  in  this 
State,  and  under  the  influence  of  which  u  hath  Jo  happily 
flourifhed  in  both  its  civil  and  religious  interefls.  But 
•whatever  be  the  origin  of  the  doctrine  ah<"ve  mentioned, 
viz.  that  the  civil  magijhate  hath  nothing  to  do  in  his 
official  capacity  in  matttrs  of  religion  ;  that  the  doctrine 
itfelfis  erroneous^  and  without  ar.y  foundation,  either  in 
reafon,  or  fcripture  ;  it  is  prejumed  will  be  madef'ffi- 
cicr.tly  manfefi  in  the  enfumg  DiffcrtaLon% 


0  &z&t  ^gQe^^^Q^/Cipf^^gfisj^sA;^  ^sAAAiA  *? 


A 
DISSERTATION 

QK    THE    RIGHT    AND     OBLIGATION     OF    THE    CIVIL    MAC?> 
TRATE    TO    8UPFORT    RELIGION* 


THE  right  and  obligation  of  the  civil  magWrafe 
to  interpofe  in  matters  of  relig  on,  is  a  Iubf<  c^ 
of  no  fmall  controverfy  at  the  prefent  day,  many 
zcaloufly  contending  that  it  is  no  part  of  the  office, 
and  duty  of  civil  rulers,  in  their  official  capacity,  to> 
make  provifion  for  the  fupport  of  religion  ;  or  to 
exercife  their  authority  in  any  refptft  relative  there- 
to. Nay,  fome  even  go  fo  far  as  to  deny  the  author- 
ity of  the  civil  magiftrate  to  protctt  religion;  ex- 
cluding the  teachers  of  it  from  the  benefit  of  the  law 
for  the  recovery  of  their  dues  for  their  official  fervi- 
ces,  from  thofe  to  whom  they  have  officiated  purfu- 
ant  to  explicit  contract.  As  1  apprehend  this  to  be 
a  fubjeft  of  great  importance,  fo  I  conceive  it  will 
not  be  deemed  an  improper  fubjc£t  of  difcuffion. 
And  fhall  accordingly  endeavor  to  maintain, 

That  the  civil  magiftrate  hath  not  only  a  right, 
but  is  indifpenfably  bound,  as  an  effential  duty  of 
his  office,  to  protect  and  fupport  religion. 

This  pofition  I  fhall  endeavor  to  eftablifh  in  the 
firft  place,  by  adducing  pofitive  and  direft  proof  of 
the  point  j  and  that  both  from  reafon  and  thefacred 


frriptures ;  a~d  then  by   obviating  the  .  feveral  ob- 
jt6tions  which  are  ufuallv  alleged  againft  it. 

Previous  to  which,  however,  it  may  be  proper  td 
intimate,»hatby  the  above  pofuion,  it  is  not  intend- 
ed to  affirm    that    the  civil    magiftrate  hath  a  right, 
much  lei's  that  he  is  in   duty    bound,  to  enforce  by 
penal  laws,  a  fubfcription  or  affrnt  to  any  particular 
creed,  or  articles  of  faith,  or    a  conformity   to  any 
particular  ceremonies,  or  modes  of  religious  wor- 
Jh  p,  upon  any   fubjccls  of  the  government,  contra- 
ry   to   their  avowed     confcienciors  belief.       The 
rights  of  eonfcience,   and  private   judgment  in  mat- 
ters of  religion,  are  doubtlefs    facred  and  unaliena- 
ble ;  and  cannot  be  lawfully  reftricled,  or  infringed, 
bv  any  human  authority  whatfoever.     This  conces- 
fi  >n,  however,  may  r<  quire  fome    explanation;  that 
is,  that  it  refpecls  thofe  religious  fentiments,  or  fuch 
religious  f;.  ftems  only,  as  are  not  incompatible  with 
the  fafety  of  civil  Ibciety.      For  when  any  particular 
members  of  a  civil  community  maintain  opinions  in- 
confiftont  with  the  fafety  of  the  community,  I  con- 
ceive it  a  very  clear  point,  that  fuch  civil  fociety  i& 
not  bound  to  tolerate  fuch  members.     Agreeably  to 
this  fentiment,    Mr.  Locke  in  his  treatife  on  tolera- 
tion, obfervey,  that  a  proteftant  Mate  is  not  bound  to 
tolerate  roman  catholics,  in  as  much  as  it  is  one  ex- 
prefs  article  of  their  religion,  that  faith  is  not  to   be 
kept  with  heretics,  as  they  fiile  all  denominations  of 
chriftians,  who  are  not  of  their  communion;  and  as 
they  acknowledge    fubje&ion   to  a  foreign  jurisdic- 
tion, viz.  the  roman  pontiff;  who  challenges  a  pow- 
er to  abfolve  them  from  all  oaths  of  allegiance,   or 
any  engagements,  however  facred,  which  they    may 
be  under  to  their  own  government.     And  by  parity 
of  reafon,  I  fee   not  why  the   fame  obfervation    will 
rot  app'y    with  equal  force  to  atheifts,  and  all  others 
who  deny  a  future  Rate  of  retribution,  or  who  main- 
tain any  principles  inconfiflent  with  the  nature  and 
obligation  of  an  oath. 


a 

.  Having  made  thefe  preliminary  obfervation3 ) 
the  way  is  prepared  to  attend  to  the  eviednce,  in  fup- 
port  of  our  petition  above  Rated;  which  was  propo-. 
fed  to  be  derived ,  both  from  reafon  and  the  facred 
oracles. 

And  in  the  Firjl  place,  reafon  teaches  that  thq 
grand  objefct  and  defign  of  the  inftitution  of  civil 
government,  is  the  good  and  happinefs  of  the  com- 
munity. The  truth  of  this  pofnion  is  fo  obvious, 
and  fo  generally  conceded,  that  to  attempt  to 
prove  it,  would  be  nugatory  and  impertinent.  And 
confequen  ly>  that  whatever  hath  a  manifelt  tenden- 
cy to  promote  the  public  good,  belongs  to  the  pro- 
vince of  the  civil  magiftnte.  But  that  religion  hath 
a  tendency  to  promote  the  public  good,  or  the  civil 
benefit  of  focieiy*  is  a  point  fo  evident,  that  none 
who  are  not  infected  with  the  late  French  mania,  car> 
pretend  to  doubt  ;  or  call  it  in  queftion.  In  [o 
much  that  it  is  prefumed,  that  hiftory  does  not  afford 
an  inftanceofa  nation,  who  have  attempted  to  lup- 
port  civil  government,  without  the  aid  and  interven- 
tion of  religion,  till  the  late  mad  attempt  in  France  ; 
which,  however,  after  a  very  fhort  experiment,  hath 
proved  abortive  ;  and  the  projectors  of  a  govern- 
ment founded. in  atheifm,  have  been  convinced  by 
dire  experience  of  the  folly  ?  abfurdity,  and  madnefs 
of  the  attempt. 

The  neceffity  of  religion  for  the  fupport  of 
civil  government ;  or  its  tendency  to  promote  the 
good  of  fociety,  appears  from  two  confiderations. 

id.  As  it  is  the, grand  nexus  or  bond  of  union, 
which  binds  civil  fociety  together;  without  which, 
the  focial  compaft  would  want  its  principal  force 
and  validity  j  as  it  is  the  only  foundation,  upon* 
which  the  facrednefs,  and  obligation  of  oaths,  and. 
every  kind  of  engagements,  which  are  effential  to 
the  exiftence  of  civil  fociety  intirely  depend; 
and  without  which  government  could  not  fuMi'/t, 
truth  be  inveftigated,  or  juftice  adminiftered  to  the 

B 


proper  fuVjecls.  For  w  fie  re  thefe  fundimentai  articles 
of  nil  religion,  are  denied  or  d  (believed,  viz.  the 
ex  ftence  of  a  God,  the  immortality  of  the  foul,  ar,d 
a  future  {late  of  r --tribution  ;  what  imaginable  foun- 
dation can  theie  be  left  fofthe  obligation  of  an  oath, 
or  the  moft  folemn  engagements,  or  declarations 
which  a  perfon  could  make  ?  or  what  dependance 
could  be  rationally  placed  thereon  ?  on  ftjppnfiiion 
of  the  difbelief  of  the  above  mentioned  articles,  a 
perfon  would  have  no  pofFrble  motive  to  fpeak  the 
truth,  rather  than  the  contrary,  or  to  pay  the  le^fi: 
regard  to  his  moft.  facred  engagements,  but  what  is 
derived  from  a  refpeft  to  his  temporal  rntercftor  hon- 
or ;  which  in  innumerable  inftances  would  predom- 
inate in  favor  of  falfhood,  and  confequently  be  pro- 
ductive of  correfpondent  effects ;  all  motives  from 
confeience,  and  the  fear  of  God,  being  by  the  fup- 
pofition  precluded.  From  the  above  observations, 
it  appears,  as  I  conceive,  very  manifeft  that  religion? 
is  of  efTential  importance,  not  only  to  the  well  being,' 
but  even  to  the  very  exigence  of  civil  government 
and  fociety,  and  confequently,  that  according  to' 
the  above  pofition,  it  is  what  civil  rulers  have  not 
only  a  right,  but  are  indifpenfably  bound*  to  make 
an  objf  0.  of  their  attention,  as  an  efTential  part  of 
their  official  duty.  Indeed,  religion  and  govern- 
ment have  evidently  a  reciprocal  dependance  upon 
each  other,  and  one  cannot  ordinarily  fubfid  with- 
out the  other  ;  at  lead  the  latter  without  the  form- 
er. As  a  confirmation  of  this  truth,  it  is  obfervable, 
that  the  champions  of  infidelity  at  the  prefent  day3 
are  no  lefs  oppofed  to  the  reftraints  of  human  laws, 
than  thofe  of  religion  ;  contending  for  univerfal  li- 
centioumefs,  or  following  the  dictates  of  nature  ai 
efTential  to  liberty,  and  the  acme  of  human  perfec- 
tion.*    Bu:, 

*  Not  to  mention  Godwin  and  the  modern  French  phtfofophen, 
the  author  hath  been  credibly  informed  that  a  certain  perfonage  of 
diftiiiguilhed  eoiiner.ee  in  America,  hath  declared,  that  we  neves' 


id.  That  religion  is  conducive  to  the  benefit  and 
well  being  of  civil  fockty,  and  conuquently  that  ft 
is  an  objeQ  of  civil  government,  is  evident  from  its 
falutary  influence  upon  the  morals  of  mankind,  or 
its  tendency  to  prevent  ibofe  vices,  crimes,  anden- 
ormities,  which  are  definitive  to  ibciety,  and  which 
are  inconfiftent with  HS  fafeky  and  happinefs. 

Itcannocbe  denied  without  nianifuit  abfurdity, 
contradiction,  and  the  pfafre{|  dictates  of  reafon, 
and  the  common  fenfe  of  mankind,  that  vice  and 
immorality,  or  crimes  of  alnv-it  every  denomin.r 
fuel]  for  i  nil  a  nee,  as  murder,  robbery,  piracy,  theif, 
perjury,  f  ir^ery,  cape,  ;vJuitery,  and  innumerable 
others,  neediefs  to  ir.encion,  have  a  moil  direct  ten- 
dency to  prevent  the  prosperity  and  happinels  of 
civil  fociety,  and  to  involve  il  in  miUry  and  ruin. 
Nor  is  it  Be  ft  evidently  a  dictate  of  common  fenfe, 
that  even  the  fpeci;'aive  belief  of  the  great  doc- 
rines  of  religion,  fuch  as  the  being,  and  perfections 
of  God,  and  the  future  accountability  of  mankind, 
for  their  condu£t  in  this  life,  hath  a  very  powerful 
tendency  to  reftrain  men  from  the  cornmiffion  of 
fucli  crimes,  and  the  practice  of  fuch  vices  ;  and  in 
ma<iy  inllinces,  a  more  powerful  tendency,  khan  can 
be  derived  from  any  other  confiderations.  t  fpe- 
cially  when  thefe  folemn  truths  are  frequently  he'd 
up  to  their  View,  and  preifed,  and  urged  upon  their 
minds.* 

ftn'tl  enjoy  liberty  in  this  country,  rill  religion  and  govonnMQt,  and 
the  marriage  inltitution,  are  abolilhed  1  Which  is  ihc  quinteflence  of 
the  G'ldwiniai  fyfiem. 

*  The  truth  of  the  above  obfervation  is  clearly  illuft rated  ir.  the 
example  of  the  patriarch  Abraham,  who,  as  an  apohgy  for  Calling 
his  wife  his  fuirer,  alleges  that  he  thqug&t  finely  the  fear  of  God  was 
not  in  that  place,  and  thai  therefore  they  would  iity  him  for  hi« 
wife's  take  :  plainly  intimating  that  he  did  not  confider  his  life  fe- 
cure  from  violence,  amongft  a  people  who  were  not  under  the  influ- 
ence of  the  fear  of  God.  The  fame  truth  is  alfo  exemplified  in  an- 
other celebrated  character  of  antiquity  :  who  from  the  influence  of 
the  fame  principle,  was  enabled  to  withftani  the  foliicitations  of  a 
It.wd  wokiian  in  whofe  power  he  was ;  faying,  haw  (hall  1  do  this  gteaj 


There  are  few  perfons  under  ftated  and  pub- 
lic religious  inftru&ion,  who  can  fo  far  divert  themr- 
feives  of  the  checks  and  reftraints  of  confcience,  as 
to  be  able  to  counteract  its  admonitions,  without 
fenfible  pain  and  remorfe  ;  and  who  from  that  con- 
fideration  alone,  are  not  reftrained  from  the  perpe- 
tration of  many  crimes,  and  enormities,  which  not- 
withstanding any  other  reftraint,  they  would  not  hes- 
itate at  all  to  commit.  The  truth  of  this  obfervation 
being  admitted,  the  truth  of  which,  I  conceive  needs 
nothing  to  be  faid  by  way  of  confirmation,  the  con- 
fcquence  is  undeniable,  that  religion  hath  a  mani- 
feft  tendency  to  ?he  benefit,  and  happinefs  of  civil 
fociety,  and  confequently  that  it  is  an  object  per- 
taining to  the  province  of  the  civil  magiftrate,  to 
make  provifion  for  its  fupport. 

Having  taken  a  brief  view  of  fome  of  the  rational 
arguments  in  favor  of  the  right,  and  duty  of  the 
civil  magiftrate  to  fupport  religion,  we  may  in  the 

Second  place  enquire,  what  evidence,  in  fupport 
of  our  pofition,  may  be  derived  from  divine  infpira- 
tion  ?     And, 

To  this  purpofe,  we  may  obferve  in  general,  that 
it  was  the  univerfal  practice  of  the  civil  rulers  of  the 

wickednefs  and  fin  againft  God  ?  Very  pertinent  to  the  fame  pur- 
pofe alfo  is  the  declaration  of  Nehemiah,  the  pious  governor  of  the 
Jews,  v/ho  fpeaking  of  the  oppreflion  of  his  predeceffors  in  office, 
obferves  :  but  fo  did  not  I,  becaufe  of  the  fear  of  God  :  it  is  not  a 
little  curious,  however,  to  obferve  the  contrail  heween  the  fentiment 
of  the  above  mentioned  patri3rchs,and  a  certain  modern  philofoj  her  j 
who  hsppofes  it  of  no  confequence,  or  no -injury  to  him,  that  his 
neighbor  (hould  be  an  atheift,  or  a  believer  in  no  God  :  that  it 
would  neither  break  his  leg,  or  pick  his  pocket  f.  But  with  due 
deference  to  fo  high  an  authority,  it  may,  it  is  conceived,  admit  a 
query,  whether  the  hv  menial  bed  of  a  certain  gentleman,  might 
not  have  been  lefs  expofed  to  violation,  had  his  neighbor  been  un- 
der the  influence  of  a  reverential  belief  of  cne  God,  inftead  of  no 
God  ?  As  this  belief  operated  as  an  effectual  reftraint  upon  the  pa- 
triarch J.,feph,  above  referred  to,  from  a  compliance  with  the  feduc- 
fions  of  a  lacivious  woman,  doubtlefs  the  fame  principle  would  have 
Ipeen  no  Iefs  prevalent  in  reftraining  him  from  acting  the  part  of  a 
ieducer. 


Ifraelitifli  and  Jewifh  nations,  fanftioned  with  the 
moll  unequivocal  expreffions  of  divine  approba- 
tion. This  obfervation  holds  emphatically  true, 
with  refpecl  to  thofe,  v/ho  (land  characlerifed  on 
facred  record,  as  good  rulers:  particularly  David, 
Solomon,  A  fa,  Jehofaphat,  Hezekiah,  and  Jofiah, 
who  are  celebrated  as  eminently  good  kings,  aj.d 
represented  as  having  been  very  afliduous  in  the 
care  and  attention  which  they  excrciled,  relative  to 
matters  of  religion,  prelerving  it  from  corruption, 
and  reftoring  its  inititutions  in  their  puritv,  when 
they  had  been  depraved,  and  neglefied,  and  making 
provifion  for  the  lupporc  of  the  public  worfliip,  and 
ordinances  of  God,  and  the  minifters  of  the  temple 
and  the  altar  ;  proclaiming  fails,  and  days  of  humil- 
iation, for  national  (ins,  and  to  deprecate  national 
judgments,  and  to  implore  national  b!e flings  ;  for 
which  they  are  handed  down  to  posterity,  with  hon- 
or, and  cmphatical  tokens  of  divine  approbation, 
and  as  examples  for  the  imitation  of  other  ruler*, 
in  all  fucceedingagcs,* 


*  To  which  may  be  adiLd  the  example  of  the  king  of  Nineveh, 
who  upon  the  denuncia  ion  of  deftruclion  upon  his  kingdom,  for 
their  great  wickednefs,  by  the  prophet  Jonah,  proclaimed  a  fad,  and 
enjoined  the  obfervation  of  it  with  the  utmoft  rigor  Upon  which 
t he  anger  of  the  Drity  was  placated,  and  the  threatened  calamity 
averted.  But  he  lived  in  the  dark  ages,  and  was  a  poor  ignorant 
pagan  !  had  he  been  as  wife,  and  han  underftood  the  limi's  of  his 
own  perogative  a9  weil  as  the  illuminated  legiflatureo/  Rhode- 1  Hand, 
be  would  not  have  prefumed  to  have  meddled  in  fuch  matters,ev"en  Co 
much  as  to  have  recommenced  a  faft  ;  and  Nineveh  would  confe- 
quently  have  been  deftroyed.  But  his  conduct  met  the  divine  ap- 
probation; and  all  thofe  who  deny  the  right  of  the  civil  magirtrare 
to  fupport  religion,  confeqmsntly  ftand  confuted.  No  lefs  pertinent 
to  thisi  purpofeare  the  examples  of  Cyrus,  Darius,  and  Artaxerxes, 
kings  of  Perfta,  in  the  provisions  which  they  made,  and  the  orders 
and  commiffions  which  they  ilfucd  under  divine  influence,  for  re- 
building the  temple,  and  rearing  the  worfhip  of  God,  and  the  in- 
ititutions of  religion  at  Je rufalem  ;  of  which  we  have  an  account  at 
hr^e  in  the  books  of  Kzra  and  Nehemiah.  Had  they  lived  and 
done  the  like  in  this  enlightened  land  and  ape,  the  Tatnai?,  the  Tobi- 
ahs.the  Sbeihnbjz«ais\  the  Sanballats',the  Gefhams',  and  the  Gafh- 
mues'  of  the  prefent  day,  would  doubtlefs  with  great  zeal  and  patii- 


And  on  the  other  hand,  thofe  kings  and  rute, 
who  have  been  of  an  oppofite  character,  have  been 
handtd  down  to  pofteriiy,  (ligmatized  with  marks 
of  infamy,  and  d.vine  difpleafure  ;  as  Jereboams 
Ahab,  Ahaz,  Manaffah,  Amnion,  &c.  To  cite  all 
the  particular  paflages  calculated  to  illuftrate  the 
foregoing  observations,  would  be  to  tranfcribe  a 
great  part  of  the  books  of  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings, 
Chronicles,  and  indeed  of  the  whole  of  the  old  tefta- 
ment.  But  there  is  one  paffage  in  the  book  of  Ne- 
hemiah,  the  pertinency  of  which,  to  the  prefent  fub~ 
jeci,  is  fuch,  as  demands  particular  attention.  The 
paffage  I  refer  to  is  contained  in  the  13th  Chapter, 
lOih,  11th  and  12th  verfes. 

And  I  perceived  that  the  portion  of  the  I.evites 
had  not  been  given  them  :  but  the  Levhes,  and  the 
fingers  that  did  the  work  (that  is,  the  work  of  the 
fanBuary)  had  fled  every  one  to  his  field.  Then 
contended  I   with   the   rulers,  and  laid   why  is  the  . 

otifm  have  founded  an  alarm,  that  the  liberties  of  the  people  were 
in  imminent  danger,  from  a  confoiracy  of  church  and  ttate.  The 
form  of  government  uni'er  which  Jcrufalem  and  the  temr'e  was  re- 
built, and  the  tempie  worfhip  rtitoied  after  the  Babjlornlh  captivi- 
ty, was  monarchical  ;  and  therefore  the  it.fidels  srd  cten  ies  (  f  reli- 
gion of  that  day,  with  a  view  tofruftrate  the  pious  attempts  of  the 
Jews,  and  to  deprive  them  of  the  royal  patronage  and  fupport,  with- 
out which,  they  knew  they  could  not  fucced  ;  re^refented  to  the 
Perfi3n  monarch,  that  if  he  fuffered  them  to  proceed  to  build  the 
city  and  temple,  and  confequently  to  reftore  the  Jewilh  religion  j 
it  would  endanger  a  diminu'ion  of  the  royal  tevenue  :  and  for  this 
purpofe  they  wrote  to  the  king  in  thefe  words.  Be  it  known  unto 
the  king,  that  if  this  city  be  bui'.ded,  and  the  walls  thereof  let  up 
attain  ;  then  will  they  not  pay  toil,  tribute,  orcuftom  ;  and  fo  thou 
(hilt  endanger  the  revenue  of  the  kings.  Ezra^h,  13'h.  Had  the 
government  been  popular,  or  republican,  the  mode  of  attack  wonld 
doubtlefs  have  been  like  that  of  their  prefent  fuccclTors,  viz.  by  in- 
iinuaiing  that  (or  government  to  meddle  with3  or  patronize  reli- 
gion, would  endanger  the  liberties  of  the  people.  But  in  either 
cafe  faifhood  and  snifreprefentaiion  would  have  been  of  effenfial  im- 
portance As  it  is  a  dottrineof  the  roman  catholic  faih,  that  it  fa 
lavful  and  commendable  to  lie  for  the  good  of  the  church  ;  fo  it. 
i»efteemedno  lefs  lawful,  and  meritorious  bv  the  infidels,  and  OHD- 
ute  philofophcis  of  the  prefent  day,  to  lie  for  its  deftruftion. 


houfe  of  God  forfaken  ?4  And  I  gathered  them  to- 
gether, and  fet  them  in  their  place.  Then  brought 
all  Judah  the  tithe  of  the  corn,  and  the  new  vine, 
and  the  oil  into  the  treafuries.  From  this  p  aflame, 
it  is  evident,  beyond  controvcrfy  that  Nehemiah, 
the  pious  governor  of  Judah,  upon  his  arrival  at 
jerufalem,  to  take  upon  him  the  civil  government 
of  the  Jews,  makes  it  one  rf  the  firft  objefls  of  his 
attention,  to  provide  for  the  regular  and  inftituted 
worfliip  of  God,  and  the  fupport  of  the  minihVrs  of 
religion;  cenfuring  the  fubordiate  rulers,  for  their 
negleft  of  their  duty  in  this  refpeft  ;  imputing  a  1 
the  blame  of  the  houfe  of  God's  being  forfiken,  to 
them  (then  contended  I  with  the  rulers,)  faving,  why 
is  the  houfe  of  God  forfaken?  And  fiomacon- 
cioufnefs  of  having  herein,  faithfulh  difcharged  the 
duty  of  his  office,  he  prays,  as  verfe  14' h.  Remem- 
ber me,  O  my  God,  concerning  this,  and  wipe  not 
out  my  good  deeds,  that  I  have  done  to  the  houfe  of 
my  God,  and  the  offices  thereof  !  What  clearer  de- 
monstration can  be  exhibited,  that  it  belongs  to  the 
office  of  the  civil  magiilrate  to  fake  care  of  religion, 
and  provide  for  its  fupport,  than  the  example  of  a 
civil  magiftrate  of  God's  peculiar  people,  under  di- 
vine direction  and  infpiration,  ?6iually  taking  upon 
himfelf  the  difcharge  of  this  office,  cenfuring,  and 
reprehending  fubordinate  rulcrr,  for  their  negligence 
in  this  refpefr,  and  folemnly  appealing  to  heav- 
en for  his  fidelity,  in  the  performance  of  this 
fervice,  as  a  part  of  his  official  duty  ?  Indeed 
it  mud  be  acknowledged,  that  the  proof  from  the 
new-teftament,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  civil  magis- 
trate to  fupport  religion,  is  not  quite  fo  abundant, 
and  explicit  as  from  the  old.  But  if  nothing  had 
been  foid,  relative  to  the  fubjeft  in  the  new-tefta- 
ment, dire&ly  nor  indireftly,  except  it  had  been  in 
direct  oppofition,  and  contradiction  thereto  ;  that 
would  not  have  invalidated  the  arguments,  in  fup- 
port of  our  pofition  from  the  old-tcfiament.     As  no 


so 


reafon  can  be  affigned,  why  it  Ihould  be  the  duty 
of  the  civil  mag.ftrate,  to  fupport  religion  under  the 
old  tell  anient  difpenfation,  which  doth  not  operate 
v;ith  equal  force  under  the  new  ;  (as  may  more  ful- 
ly appear  in  the  lequel)  as  there  is  nothing  in  the 
nature,  or  complexion  of  the  thing  itfeif,  to  lead  us 
to  conclude,  that  it  was  a  part  of  the  ceremonial 
law;  or  that  it  was  peculiar  to  the  Jewifh  economy. 
On  the  contrary,  that  it  is  evidently  of  a  moral  na- 
ture, refulting  from  the  nature,  relations,  and  fitnefs 
of  things.  That  it  is  founded  in  reafon,;  and  con- 
ducive to  the  happinefs,  and  well  being  of  civil  fo- 
ciet)  ;  as  hath  been  made  fofficiently  manifeft,  in' 
the  preceding  obfervations.  But  there  is  one  paf- 
fage  in  the  prophefy  of  Ifaiah3  though  ah  old  tefta- 
ment.  writer,  which  may  yet  be  confidered,  as  afford- 
ing dire  ft  proof,  that  it  is  the  duty  and  office  of  the 
civil  magiftrate  to  fupport  religion  under  the 
gofpel.  The  pafTage  referred  to,  is  in  the  49th 
Chapter,  at  the  23d  vtrk.  Where  defcribing  the 
happy  Mate  of  the  church,  in  gofpel  times,  the  pro- 
phet declares,  that  flic  fhailbe  the  fubjtctof  the  fos- 
tering, narturing  care  of  civil  rulers,  in  thefe  mem- 
orab  e  words.  Kings  fhall  be  thy  nurfing  fathers,  and 
their  queens  thy   nuifing  mothers. 

I  am  not  infenfible  of  the  glofs  put  upon  thefe 
words  by  thofe  who  deny  it  to  belong  to  the  office 
and  duty  of  civil  rulers  to  fupport  religion  in  their 
official  capacity,  viz.  That  they  fignify  no  more  than 
that  civil  rulers  ffiall  protect  chriftians  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  their  natural  rights,  allow  them  liberty  of 
confeience,  and  the  free  exercife  of  their  reli- 
gion, &c.  But  that  this  cannot  be  confidered  as  the 
true  conftru&ion  of  the  prophefv,  I  conceive  muft 
be  evident  from  feveral  confiderations.  As  fit  ft, 
that  according  to  this  conftru&ion,  the  words  are 
expreffive  of  no  peculiar  privilege  which  the  church 
or  chriftians  fhould  enjoy  in  diftin&ion  from  the  reft 
of  mankind.     For  protection  againft  external  injury, 


ii 


and  in  the  enjoyment  of  natural  rights,   is  what  aU 
men  are  entitled  to  expect  from  civil    government, 
and  which  under  every  good  government  they   will 
enjov.     But  the  words  under  confideratton  evident- 
ly   import  fotnething  more  than  this,  viz.   fome  fpe- 
cial  privilege   which  chriftians    fhould  enjoy  above, 
or  in   d;flinclion  from    mankind  in  general.     Again 
2dly.   1  hat  the  above  conft.  uftion  cannot  be  the  true 
one,  is  evident,  in  that  it  does  not  comport  with  the 
idea  which  Inch  a  reprefentauon   naturally  conveys 
to  the  mind  ;    or  with   the  character  and  office  of  a 
nurfe ;  whofe  office  and  duty  it  is  not  only  to  guard 
and  protect  the  child  from  external  harm  and  injury, 
but  alfo  to  provide  for  it  proper  and  wholefome  food, 
and  medicines  together  with  the  means  of  ir.ftruclion 
and  difcipiine,  according  to  the  age  and  exigence  of 
the  child  ;   which   is  a  very   proper  and   natural  me- 
taphor when   applied    to  civil  imgiftrates   and    the 
churchj  to  rcprefent  the  duty  of  the  former  with  re- 
fpect  to  the  latter;    or  in  other  word?,    to   teach  us 
that  it  is  the  duty  and  office  of  the  civil   magiflrate 
to  protect,  cheriih,  patronize,   and  fupport  religion; 
and   alfo,   that   it   is  a    privilege    which  the  church 
fhould   eminently  enjoy    in    gofpel   times.       From 
which  a  thought  naturally  occurs  as  a  further  con- 
firmation of  the  truth  of  the  poution,  I  have  been 
endeavoring   to  eftah  iflfl,  viz.  That  if  it  is   not  the 
duty  and  office  of  the  civil  magiftrate  to  fupport  re- 
ligion under  the  gofpsi-difpenfation,  then  it  will  fol- 
low th.it  the  privileges  of  the  church  are  dia.inifhed 
under  the  gofpel,'  and   that  the  old-teliament  church 
enjoyed  a   privilege   fuperior  to  that  of  the  new ;  or 
rather  that  the  former  enjoyed  a  privilege  of  which 
the  latter  is  deprived  :   unlefs  it  mould  be   faid  that 
it  was  no    privilege  at  all    for  the  civil  magiflrate  to 
take  care  of  the  ituercft  of  religion,    and  provide  for 
its    fupport   under    the   old-teftamer.t    difper.fation ;. 
which  to  fay,  I  conceive,   would  be  nothing  fhori  of 
an  arrogant  and  impious  impeachment  of  the  wiidom 

C 


IS 

of  Fiim  who  was  and  is  the  divine  head  and  lawgiver* 
of  his  ohurcb,  bo:h  under  the  oid  teftament  and  un- 
der the  new. 

Bat  furthermore,  though  it  hath  been  conceded 
that  the  proof  of  our  pofition  from  the  new- teftament 
is  not  fo  explicit,  direcl,  and  abundant  as  from  the 
did,  yet  taken  in  connexion  with  the  old,  the  argu- 
ments in  confirmation  of  the  fame  general  truih,  are 
amply  fufficient  to  put  the  matter  beyond  all  rea- 
sonable doubt. 

One  probable  reafon  why  the  writers  of  the  new- 
teftament,  or  rather  that  divine  Spirit  by  whom  they 
were  infpired^  did  not  fee  fit  to  be  more  explicit 
upon  this  fubjeft,  is,  that  it  Was  fo  clearly  and  abun- 
dantly evident  from  the  old  tcfUrrienf,  as  not  to  re- 
quire to  be  largely  and  particularly  infifted  upon 
under  the  new  ;  and  alio  as  the  reafons  upon  which 
the  duty  is  founded  appear  evidently  to  be  of  a  mo- 
ral nature,  and  confequently  of  perpetual  obligation. 
Hence  our  Lord  declares,  that  he  came  not  to  de- 
stroy the  law  and  the  prophets  --and  that  not  one  jot 
or  tittle  thereof  (hall  fail,  till  all  be  fulfilled. 

Another  probable  reafon  of  this  omiflion  is,  that 
when  the  new  teftament  Was  written,  the  civil  pow- 
ers of  the  world  were  oppofed  to  chriftianity. 
For  the  Apoftles,  therefore,  to  have  explicitly  in- 
filled upon  the  duty  of  the  civil  msgiftrateto  fupport 
chiiftianity,  would  have  tended  greatly  to  incenfe, 
and  incur  the  refentment  of  civil  rulers  againft  chrif- 
tians,  and  to  bring  their  vengeance  upon  them  with 
redoubled  fury. 

But  notwiihftanding  this  apparent  caution  of  the 
facred  writers  of  the  new-teftament,  relative  to  this 
fubjeft,  they  have  yet  taken  fufficient  care  to  eftab- 
lifh  the  general  principle;  that  when  the  rulers  of 
the  world,  Or  any  of  them,  ihould  become  chriftian, 
they  might  find  their  duty  clearly  defignated,  and 
pointed  out,  viz.  to  be  nurfing  fathers  to  the  church, 
and  to  take  religion    under  their  official  patronage 


and  protection.     This  is  iufinciently  intimated  1  Corv 
ix.  13,  14.    Do  ye  not    know  that  thev  that  minifter 
about  holy  things,    live  of  the  things  of  the  tempic  ? 
and  they  that  wait  at  the  al'.2r,  are  pzrnkers  with  the 
altar?    Even.fo   hath    the    Lord  oidained,  that  they 
that  preach  the  gofpel,  (hould  live  of  the  gofpel.     In 
thefe  words,  the  tight  of  the  preachers  of  the  g*^{pc  !9 
to  a    maintenance  and  fupport,    is  not  only  clearly 
and  pofitively  affcrtedj  as  being  of  divine  ordination 
and  appointment;    hut  there  is  an   a  lufion  to  \hfi 
provifion  made  hy   the  law  under  the  old  teftament, 
for   the    fupport    of     the    ministers   of    the    temple, 
and    the    altar  ;     which     provifion    was   under   ihe 
direction    of    the    civil     map,' fir  ate,    as   hath    been 
made   abundantly     evident   in    the    preceding    part 
of    this     diftena.ion.       And   the     Apoftle    having 
referred   to   that    it.ftitution   as   a   truth   which    the 
Corinthians  very.  wAl  knew  ;  do  ye   not    know,  Szc. 
proceeds  to  apply  it  to  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel  as 
to  the  general  principle  ;    even  fo  hath  the   Lord  or- 
dained, that  they  that  preach  the  gofpel,  fhould  live 
of  the  gofpel.     It  is. not  indeed   pretended  that    the 
words  even  jo,    denote  a  perfect,  parel lei  or  fimilarity 
between  the  provifion  made  by  the   law   for  the    mi- 
nifters of  the  old-teflament,  and  that  which  the  Lord 
hath  ordained  for.  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel.      In 
feveral  circumftantial  refpects  there  is  a  material  dif- 
ference.     Particularly,  with-  refpect.   to  the  mode  in 
which  they  were  to  he  rcfpeciively  fupported.     But 
doubtlefs  the  expreflion  imports  thus  much,  viz.  that 
with   refpeft  to  the  principle  upon  which  they  were 
refpe£tively  entitled  to  a  fupport. there  is  a  perfect  pa- 
rellel,  viz.  the  principle  of  moral  rectitude,  or  juflice 
and  equity  ;  and  alfo  that  with  refpeel  to  both,  their 
fupport  was  of  divine    inftirution  and  appointment. 
As  the  Lord  ordained  that  the    minifters  of  the  tem- 
ple and  altar  (hould  be  fupported  by  the  people,  fa 
he  hath  ordained  the  fame  with  refpect  to  the  mini- 
fters of  the  gofpel.     From  which  the  confequence  ia 
•bvious  by  genuine  conftru&ion,  that  as  the  obliga- 


M 

iion  in  both  cafes  is  the  fame,  refulting  from  a  prin- 
ciple of  moral  rcftitude,  juftice,  and  equity,  (as  may 
be  more  particnlaily  conficered  hereafter)  and  being 
both  the  fubjeft  of  divine  injunction  ;  and  as  the 
provilion  for  the  old-teftament  minifters  belonged 
to  the  province  of  the  civil  magistrate,  fo  it  is  alfo 
with  refpecl  to  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel.  As  the 
obligation  in  both  cafes  was  and  is  legal,  fo  in  both 
cafes  it  is  fubjeft  to  the  cognizance  and  jur  fdiction 
of  the  civil  magiftrate,  whofe  effice  and  duty  it  is  to 
fee  all  legal  obligations  fulfilled,  or  juftice  adminis- 
tered to  the  proper  fubjecls.  As  it  was  the  duty  of 
the  civil  magiftrate,  to  make  provifion  for  the  (up- 
port  of  religion,  or  the  ordinances,  and  minifters 
thereof,  under  the  law,  even  fo  hath  the  Lord  or- 
dained it  fhould  be  under  the  gofpel.  This  con- 
clufion,  I  conceive  naturally  follows,  from  the  pas- 
fage  which  we  have  been  confidering  by  genuine 
cor.ftruclion. 

Thus  I  have  endeavoured  to  fulfil  the  fit  ft  part  of 
the  tafk.  I  took  upon  myfelf  to  perform,  viz.  To 
adduce  fome  pofitive  proof,  both  from  reafon  and 
fcripture  ;  that  it  is  the  right,  and  duty  of  the  civil 
magiftrate  in  his  official  capacity,  to  protect  and  fup- 
port leligion. 

And,  I  flatter  myfelf  that  the  evidence  which  hath 
been  exhibited,  will  be  deemed  fufficient  to  cftahlifh 
the  point,  I  undertook  to  fupport,  unless  the  objec- 
tions, or  arguments  on  the  other  fide  of  the  ques- 
tion, fhoald  be  judged  fufficient  to  invalidate  it. 
Whether  they  are  or  not,  is  the  next  thing  propofed 
for  our  con  fide  rati  on  and  enquiry.     And, 

lit.  It  is  objected  againft  the  doctrine,  which  we 
have  attempted  to  fupport,  that  there  is  no  occafion 
for  the  interference  of  the  civil  magiftrate,  for  the 
fupport  of  religion,  becaufe,  religion  will  fupport  it- 
felf.  If  it  is  of  divine  origin,  its  divine  author  will 
take  care  of  its  prefervation  and  fupport  without  the 
feeble  aid  of  the  civil  magiftrate.     To  which  it  may 


n 

be  replied  ;  that  this  is  arguing  againft  undeniably 
fad,  admitting  the  truth  of  divine  revelation.  For 
it  is  a  facl,  beyond  alt  controverfy,  as  hath  been  al- 
ready evinced^  that  it  belonged  to  the  oMce  of  the 
civil  mag:ftrate?  under  the  old  teftament  difp.-nfation, 
to  take  cognizance  of  the  intercft  of  religion,  and 
provide  for  its  fupport,  according  ,o  the  reprefent- 
ations  contained  in  the  facred  volumn.  To  fay, 
therefore,  that  there  is  no  occafun  for  the  civil  ma- 
giftrate  to  interfere  in  matters  of  religion,  is  either  to 
contradict  plain  and  demonftrative  f;ift  ;  or  elfe  to 
charge  the  divine  author  of  that  difpenl'ation,  with 
adding  the  fa;.6lion  of  his  approbation,  and  the  feal 
of  his  authority,  to  a  ufelcls  and  unneceiTary  inftitu- 
tion  ;  for  there  can  be  no  reafon  afligned,  why  it 
Jhould  be  more  nccclfary,  or  expedient  for  the  civil 
magiftrate  to  take  cognizance  or  religion,  and  pro. 
vide  for  its  fupport,  under  the  old  teftament  difpen- 
f»ti  >n,  than  under  the  new  :  no*  to  infift  upon  what 
hath  already  been  alleged  and  proved,  from  the 
fcriptures,  which  have  been  adduced,  that  this  is  in 
i'.\Ci  a  duty  belonging  to  the  office  of  the  civil  mag- 
iflrare,  under  the  gofpel.  To  fay,  therefore,  that 
God  is  able  to  take  care  of  the  interefl  of  religion, 
and  provide  for  its  fupport,  without  the  aid  of  the 
civil  magiftrate,  is  faying  nothing  to  the  purpofe  ; 
as  it  is  faying  no  more  than  what  may  be  (aid  with 
equal  propriety,  with  regard  to  civil  government  ; 
viz.  That  God  is  able  by  his  own  immediate  power 
to  accomplilh  all  the  ends  of  that  inftitution,  without 
the  aid  and  inftrumentality  of  men  •  that  be  is  ah  e 
to  inform  the  judgment,  and  influence  the  heart  of 
men,  in  fuch  a  manner,  as  to  difpofe  them  to  do 
equ.d  juflice  to  one  another,  and  to  behave  in  all  re- 
fpects  as  good  members  of  fociety,  to  that  degree,  as 
to  lupercede  the  neceflitv  of  civil  government.  Nay, 
it  may  with  equal  propriety  be  alledged,  and  with 
equal  fotce  of  argument,  that  God  is  ab'e  to  ac- 
complish all  the  eifccls,  and  events  which  take  place 


id 

in  the  natural  and  moral  world,  by  his  own  immedi- 
ate efficiency,  which  are  produced  by  the  interven- 
tion of  fecond  caufes,  means,  or  infttuments.  As.  for 
inftance  ^he  is  able  to  caufe  the  earth  to  yield 
fpontaneoufly,  or  without  cultivation,  all  thofe  pro- 
ductions, which  are  neceffary  for.  the  fuftentation, 
prefervation,  comfort,  and  delight  of  human  life. 
But  fhall  we  conclude  from  hence,  that  civil  gov-, 
ernmentisa  ufelefs  and  unneceiTary  inft'uiion,  and 
that  all  the  beneficial  and  falutary  t  ffcfcb,  which 
are  derived  therefrom,  would  actually  take  place 
without  it  ?  or  that  the  labor  of  the  hufhandman  is 
altogether  vain,  and  that  the  blefling  above  mention, 
ed,  would  be  enjoyed  by  mankind,  without  their 
own  exertions  as  well  as  with  them  ?  The  falfliood 
and  abfurdity  of  fuch  eonclufions,  are  obvious  to. 
every  perfon,  not  totally  void  of  reafon  and  com- 
mon fenfe  j  as  they  are  not  only  contrary  to  the  ex- 
prefs  declarations  of  divine  revelation,  but  to  the 
univerfal  experience  of  mankind.  Again,  it  may  be. 
obferved  that  God  is  able  to  communicate  the 
knowledge  of  the  gofpel,  to  all  mankind,  and  the 
faving  efficacy  of  it  upon  the  hearts  of  men,  without 
means  or  inftrumer.ts.  But,  whofoever  fliould  infer 
from  hence,  that  the  gofpel  miniftry  and  the  means 
of  grace,  are  ufelefs  and  unprofitable  inftitutions. 
would  argue  againft  univerfal  experience,  and  the 
general  tenor  of  the  gofpel  ;  particularly  to  that 
declaration  of  the  Apofile  Paul  ;  faith  comes  by- 
hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  God,  for  how 
fhall  they  believe  on  him,  of  whom  they  have  not 
heard  ;  and  how  fhall  they  hear  without  a  preach- 
er ?  In  a  word,  the  objeclion  under  confideration, 
depends  for  all  its  weight  and  validity,  upon  the  fup- 
pofed  truth  of  this  pofition,  viz.  That  whatever 
the  Deity  is  able  to  effeft  by  his  own  immediate 
power,  without  the  intervention  of  means,  or  fecond 
caufes,  He  evermore  does9  and  will  effe£t  withoui 
them  ;  and  confequentlyi   that  He  never  does>  os 


1L 

vill  make^  ufe  of  any  means,  in  the  prcdu&ion  of 
any  effects  whatfoever,  either  in  the  natural  or  moral 
World  ?  Than  which  nothing  can  be  more  ablurdj 
and  repugnant  to  fact  and  univerfal  experience. 

A  2d.  objection,  which  is  often  brought  againft 
the  pofkion  which  I  have  endeavoured  to  main- 
tain, is, 

That  to  admit  that  it  belongs  to  the  office  of  the 
civil  magiftrate  to  fupport  religion,  is  to  invert  \  im 
■with  power  to  fupport  a  falfe  religion;  which  the 
objeclor  fuppofes  to  be  abfurd,  and  fufficient  to 
prove,  that  fuch  a  power  cannot  be  truly  lodged  in 
the  han's  of  the  civil  magiftrate. 

In  reply  to  which,  it  may  be  obferved,  that  it  is 
conceded,  that  under  a  pretext  of  fupporting  reli- 
gion,  the  civil  magiftrate  may  proftitute  his  power, 
for  the  fupport  of  a  falfe  religion.  That  under  a 
pretext  of  fupporting  the  worfhip  of  the  true  God, 
he  may  fupport  idolatry,  or  the  worfhip  of  falfe  gods; 
as  was  in  fa&,  the  cafe  of  the  kings  of  Ifrael,  from 
Jereboam  the  firft,  to  the  final  diflblution  of  that 
kingdom,  and  the  great  part  of  the  kings  of  Judah. 
But  this  was  a  perverfion  and  abufe  of  their  power, 
and  not  the  proper  exercife  of  it.  It  is  no  proof 
that  a  perfon  is  not  inverted  with  power  for  certain 
purpofes,  becaufe  he  is  capable  of  perverting  it  to 
very  different  purpoles  ;  and  that  he  actually  docs  fo 
pervert  it  ;  even  to  purpofes  directly  contrary  to 
thofe,  for  which  it  was  given.  If  this  objection,  or 
argument  proves  any  thing,  it  proves  too  much  ; 
viz.  That  no  man  or  body  of  men  can  be  lawfully, 
or  actually  inverted  with  any  power,  which  they  are 
capable  of  abufing,  or  perverting  to  bad  purpofes. 
But  this  goes  to  deny  that  any  man,  or  body  of  men 
are,  or  can  be  inverted  with  any  power  whatfoever. 
For  what  power  can  be  conceived  of,  with  which 
men  can  be  inverted,  which  cannot  be  thus  abufed, 
and  perverted  ?  This  argument,  or  objection,  if  it 
proves  any  thing,  proves  that  no   man3  or  body  of 


$nen  can  be  inverted  with  ihe  power  of  tegiflation,  or 
enacling  laws,  for  the  equal  adminittration  ofjuftice, 
and  the.  protection  and  fecurity  of  men  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  life,  liberty  and  property;  or  their  juft 
tights,  and  privileges  ;  becaufe,  under  fuch  a  pre- 
text, they  make  laws  ofdireftly  the  contrary  nature, 
and  tendency  ;  or  as  the  prophet  expreffes  U^Jrame 
iniquity  by  a  law.  It  proves  alio  that  no  men  may, 
or  can  be  lawfully  inverted  with  the  power  of  execu- 
ting the  law?,  or  adminirtering  juftice  between  mar* 
and  man  ;  becaufe,  under  the  pretext  of  fuch  auihor- 
ity,  they  may  be  guilty  of  great  irjurtice,  and  ep- 
prefiiurtj  by  perverting  judgment,  condemning  the 
innocent,  and  acquitting  the  guilt),  &c.  :  It  more- 
over proves,  that  no  man  may  lawfully  be  inverted- 
with  the  power  to  teach  the  doclrine,  and  inculcate 
the  duties  of  chriftianity,  becaufe5  tinder  the  cloak 
of  that  power,  he  may  teach  do&rines,  directly  con- 
trary to  thofe  of  chriftianity,  and  inculcate  for  du- 
ties, things  mort  oppofite  to  thofe  enjoined  in  the 
gofpel.  I  fay  the  objection  under  confideration,  if 
there  be  any  force  in  it,  goes  to  prove  all  the  abfurdi- 
ties  above  mentionedj  and  innumerable  more  ;  and 
therefore,  according  to  an  eftablifhed  rule  of  rea- 
foning.  proves  nothing  at  all  ;  or  hath  no  force  or 
valitiuv  in  it. 

A  3d.  objection  againrt  the  above  pofinon,  is,  that 
it. is  an  infringement  of  religion*  liberty,  or  liberty 
of  confeience,  for  the  civil  nm?  [crate  to  talce  cogni- 
zance of,  and  fupport  religion.  In  anfwer  to  this 
objection,  it  may  be  obferved, 

1.  That  it  is  fupcrceded  bi  the  conreflion  in  the 
preliminary  p;irt  of  this  dHTtff tattoo,  viz.  That  by 
the  poHtion  which  we  have  been  endeavouring  to 
ertab:iH),  it  is  not  intended  to  ;  Hi  m  that  the  civil 
magiftfate  hath  a  right,  to  e>  f  rce  upon  any  of  his 
fubjecls,  a  fubfcription,  or  affcrit  it)  any  particular^ 
creed  or  articles  of  f&ieh  ;  or  a  conformity  10  any 
particular  modes  or  forms  of  religious  woriliip,  ot 


JUL 

to  prohibit  them  the  free  profeflion  of  thofe  religiotls 
opinions,  and  that  religious  worfhip,  which  they  be- 
lieve to  be  moft  agreeable  to  the  will  of  the  Deity, 
and  moft  acceptable  to  him  ;  provided  thofe 
religious  opinions  and  worfhip,  be  not  fuch,  as 
to  be  inconfiftent  with  the  fafety  of  theftate,  or  the 
community  of  which  they  are  members.  Under 
thefe  reftriclions,  it  is  conceived  there  can  be  no 
juft  ground  to  objecl  againft  the  do&rine  contained 
in  the  above  pofition,on  account  of  any  infringement 
of  liberty  of  confcience,  therein  implied.  For  what 
imaginable  ground, can  there  be  to  complain  of  an  in- 
fringement of  liberty  of  confcience,  or  of  religious 
liberty,  when  every  perfon  hath  full  liberty  to  pro- 
ftTs  juft  fuch  a  religion,  and  to  perform  juft  fuch 
afts  of  worfhip,  as  he  is  perfuaded  in  his  own  con- 
fcience are  molt  acceptable  to  that  Being,  whom  he 
profefles  to  worfhip  :  except  only  when  the  religion 
profefled,  is  fuch  as  is  fubverfive  of  the  ftate,  or  the 
peace  and  fafety  of  the  community;  of  which  he  is 
a  member  ?     But. 

2.  In  reply  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  obfervedj 
that  the  rights  of  confcience  are  equally  facrcd,  and 
inviolable  in  all  ages;  and  whatever  can  be  juftly 
confidered  as  an  infringement  of  the  right  and  liber- 
ty of  confcience  now,  was  equally  fo  four  thoufand 
years  ago.  Whatever  is  inconfiftent  with  liberty  of 
confcience  under  the  gofpel  difpenfation,  was  no 
lefs  inconfiftent  therewith  under  the  law.  But  that 
it  was  not  inconfiftent  wiih  the  juft  rights,  and  liber- 
ty of  conlcience,  for  the  civil  magiftrate  to  protetl 
and  fupport  religion  under  the  law,  is  abundantly 
evident  from  the  facred  oracles,  as  hath  been  already 
evinced.  From  whence  it  appears  beyond  all  con- 
tradiction, that  the  civil  magiftrate  under  that  difpen- 
fation  did  according  to  divine  appointment,  and  with 
the  moft  manifeft  tokens  of  divine  approbation,  ex- 
ercife  authority  in  matters  of  religion;  making  pro- 
vifion  for  its  fupport,  protecting  it  from  its  adverla- 

D 


2Q 


rie^  Sec.  And, .therefore,  this  objection  alfo,  if  li 
he  of  anv  force,  proves  too  much,  viz.  that  God 
did  auihorife  the  Jewifh  magiftrate  to  do  that  which 
was  an  infringement  of  thejuft  rights  and  liberty  of 
conscience,  and  manifeftcd  his  approbation  of  his  fo 
doing.  That  is,  that  the  God  of  truth  and  right- 
eoufnefs,  with  whom  it  is  impoffible  to  do  any  thing 
but  what  is  perfectly  juft  and  right,  did  approve  of 
that  which  is  in  its  own  nature  unjufh  and  repugnant 
to  the  eternal  rule  of  recVuude,  or  the  motai  'awl 
And  confequently  this ohjc&ion  appears  to  be  with- 
out  any  ju!t  foundation.     But, 

4thly.  It  is  alleged  as  a  further  objec~rion  againft 
the  arguments  which  have  been  advanced  in  fupport 
of  our  pofition,  that  the  civil  government  of  the 
Jews  was  a  theocracy,  or  a  divine  government,  and 
therefore  that  there  is  no  arguing  from  the  duty  and 
office  of  the  civil  magiftrate  of  the  Jews  in  matters 
of  religion,  to  the  duty  of  chriftian  magistrates  in 
the  fame  relp  ch3or  with  regard  to  fimilar  matters. 

Upon  which  it  may  be  obferved,  that  if  by  the 
Jewifh  government  being  a  theocracy,  is  meant,  that 
the  adminiftration  of  that  government  was  by  the 
immediate  hand  of  God,  without  the  instrumentality 
of  men  ;  we  know  this  to  be  direclly  contrary  to  facl. 
Or  if  it  be  meant  that  the  Jewifh  rulers  were  by 
divine  influence  guided,  and' directed  by  fuch  an' 
infallible  irhpulfe  as  to  be -thereby  effectually  fecur- 
ed  from  ail  errors^  or  maladministration-  in  matters 
of  religion,  fo  that  the  people  might  be  aSTtired  that 
whatever  religious  opinions,  or  forms  of  worfhip 
were  patronized  by  their  rulers,  were  infallibly  rights 
and  confohant  to  the  divine  mind  and  will---- 1  fay, 
if  this  is  what  the  objetlor  would  infer  from  the 
jewifh  government  being  a  theocracy  ;  it  may  be 
replied,  that  this  alfo  is  a  mofc  palpable  mifiake,  be- 
ing repugnant  to  p.ain  and  undeniable  fa£t  :  thera 
being  nothing  more  evident  from  the  hiftory  of  tl*at 
ration,  than  ihit  their  rulers  did  in  a  variety  of  in- 
ftences,  by  their  au^hurityj  countenance  and  fupport 


±1 


very  great  errors  and  corruptions  in  religionj  both 
in  principle  and  pca&tce  ;  even  the  grpfti  ft  idolatry 
and  poiitheifm.  Or  will  it  be  alleged  as  an  infer- 
ence from  the  theocracj  of  ihf  Jewr,  that  the  true 
religion,    and    which  is   •■■  to    the   mind  and 

will  of  God,  was   more  c  ••.  •  d  ana  delineat- 

ed under  the  Tewifli  difpenfaiion  than  under  the 
chnitian,  and  attended    with    lefs    d  and    ob- 

fcurity ;   and    cc  njly  that   it    >       ;  ' 

entruli  the  fupport  of  religion    in    the    hands  o 
civil  magistrate  under  that  di  pei  fa  l<  n.    than  urjder 
the  prefent  ?    The  bear  ftaling  of  ti  '<  efis  is. 

fufficient  to  confute  it;    as  ii  is    i.i  ".  op|  -  fi 

to  the  doctrine  of  the  Apbftle  IV.  ;,  and  the  w  hole 
i  df  the  gofpel  j  which  reprefeht  the  evange- 
lical difpenfation,.  on  account  61  the  ruperabundant 
1  which  it  contains*  and  exl  ibi  s,  with  teffn  ci.  to, 
j>  n,  as  franfeending  that  of  the  law  as  much  as. 
the  meridian  iplendor  of  the  fun  exceeds  the  twink- 
ling ofihe  fhis  Tie  above,  are  the  onlv  it  (Viences,. 
which  1  conceive  of,  from  the  theocracy  of  the  Jews, 
tending  in  the  leafl  degree  to  invalidate  the  argu- 
ments frorh  the  old  tejtament  in  favor  of  its  bein^  the 
duty  of  the  chnflian  magifirate  to  fupport  religion. 
And  the fe  being  evidetrjv  falfe  and  chimerical,  the 
argument  thence  arifii.g '(lands  in  its  full  force,  the 
theoctacy  of  the  Jews  notwiihftaridiug, 

A  5th  objection  or  reafori  afii g  ed  by  ccrt-un  per- 
fonsagainfl  the  truth  of  our  ppfitiori,  is  that  thegof- 
pel  is  free  ;  by  which  they  feem  to  funpofe  that  the 
external  difpenfation  of  the  gbfpei,  or  the  mcansof 
religious  inftruction,  ought  to  be  without  expenfe 
to  thofe  who  enjoy  them  ;  or  at  leafl  that  every  one 
ought  to  be  left  to  his  own  opinion,  whether,  he  will 
contribute  any  thing  to  this  purpofe  or  not.  But 
this  opinion,  1  fcrdple  not  to  fay,  hash  nothing  to 
fupport  it,  either  from  fcripture  or  reafon.  Indeed, 
the  grace  and  fpirituai  blcffings  which  the  gofpel  ex- 
hibits, are  free  ;  nothing  can  be  freer  ;  and  all  are 


82 

invited  to  come  and  partake  of  them  freely,  without 
money,  and  without  price.  But  this  by  no  means 
implies,  that  thofe  who  labor  in  the  external  difpen- 
fation  of  'he  gofpel,  mould  not  be  fupported  by 
thofe  for  whom  thev  labor.  Hence  fays  the  Apos- 
ftle,if  we  have  miniftered  to  you  in  fpiritual  things, 
is  it  a  great  thing  that  we  mould  be  partakers  of  your 
carnal  things  ?  As  if  he  had  faid-  -if  we  have  fpent 
our  time  and  ftrength  in  laboring  for  your  fpiritual 
benefit,  is  it  an  unreafonable  or  unjuft  thing,  that 
you  mould  impart  to  us  of  thofe  temporal  good 
things,  which  are  neceflary  for  the  fupport  and  com- 
fort of  temporal  life  ?  By  no  means  ;  it  is  altogether 
juft  and  reafonable,  Hence  fays  he,  let  him  that  is 
taught  in  the  word  communicate  to  him  that  teach- 
eth  in  all  good  things.  There  is  no  more  evident 
diftate  of  reafon  and  common  juftice,  as  well  as  of 
the  facred  oracles,  than  that  the  laborer  is  worthy 
of  his  hire,  or  his  reward;  which  are  the  exprefs 
words  of  our  Saviour,  relative  to  this  very  fubjeft, 
viz.  The  right  of  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel  to  a 
compenfation  for  their  minifterial  labors.  But  if 
they  are  worthy  of  their  reward,  as  other  laborers 
are,  then  it  is  their  juft  due  :  And  if  it  is  their  juft 
clue,  then  they  are  entitled  to  fome  effectual  means, 
whereby  to  obtain  it ;  which  can  be  no  other  than 
the  power  of  the  civil  magiftrate,  whofe  duty  and 
office  it  is,  to  fee  juftice  duly  adminiftered  between 
man  and  man  ;  or  that  every  man  hath  his  juft  due. 
So  that  it  is  evident  to  a  demonftration,  that  it  is  not 
left  to  everyone's  option,  who  fits  under  the  difpen- 
fation  of  the  gofpel,  and  enjoys  the  benefit  of  min- 
ifterial labors,  either  directly,  or  indirectly,  whether 
he  will  contribute  any  thing  to  the  fupport  of  it  or 
not.  In  this  refpecl  the  gofpel  neither  is,  nor  ever 
was  defigned  to  be  free.  But  doth  not  our  Lord,, 
when  he  fent  forth  his  difciples  to  preach  the  gofpel, 
fay,  freely  ye  have  received,  freely  give  ?  I  anfwerj 
this  refers  to  thofe  miraculous  operations  which  they 


were  empowered  to  perform.  Matt.  x.  8.  Heal 
the  fick,  cieanfc  the  lepers,  raife  the  dead,  call  out 
devils;  freely  ye  have  received,  freely  give.  Thefe 
gifts  were  to  be  difpenfed  freely,  beinij  properly  the 
works  of  God  and  not  of  man.  Hence  to  have  ta- 
ken a  reward  for  them,  would  have  been  highly  im- 
pious ;  as  is  particularly  evident  from  the  inftance 
of  Simon  Magus,  who  offered  money  to  ihe  Apofl'e 
Peter,  for  the  power  of  communicating  the  miracu- 
lous giffs  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  ;  to  whom  Peter  re- 
plies, thy  money  ptrijh  with  thee,  hcaufc  thou  thought' 
eft  that  the  gift  of  God  might  be  pur  chafed  with  money. 
But  with  refpeel  to  preaching,  the  direction  was 
take  neither  pur fe  nor  jcript  &c.  for  your  journey,  for 
the  laborer  is  worthy  of  /us  reward,  But  it  is  ob- 
jected, 

6thly.  That  our  Lord  declares  that  his  kingdom  is 
not  of  this  world  ;  and,  therefore,  fa\  s  the  objeclor, 
it  is  not  to  be  fupported  by  temporal  means,  or  the 
power  of  the  civil  fivord,  or  fecular  power,  as  is  the 
cafe  with  refpeel;  to  temporal  kingdoms. 

This  declaration  we  have,  John  xviii.  36.  Jefus 
faid,  my  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  ;  if  my  king- 
dom were  of  this  world,  then  would  my  fervants 
fight  for  me,  that  I  fhould  not  be  delivered  to  the 
Jews.  But  now  is  my  kingdom  not  from  hence. 
But  I  conceive  it  mud  be  by  a  very  lingular 
kind  of  logic  to  infer  from  the  above  declaration, 
that  the  civil  magiilrate  in  his  official  capacity,  hath 
no  concern  with  religion,  or  that  it  is  not  his  duty 
to  protect  and  fupportit.  Chrifl's  kingdom  being 
not  of  this  world,  might  be  a  very  good  reafon 
why  he  had  not  an  army,  or  a  life  guard  to  defend 
him  againft  his  enemies  ;  and  yet  be  no  reafon  at 
all  why  the  civil  magiftrate  fhould  not  protect  and 
fupport  religion.  The  force  of  this  objection  fecms 
to  depend  upon  the  fuppofition  that  no  human  means, 
or  inflruments,  were  to  be  employed  in  the  propa- 
gation and  fupport  of  Chrifl's  kingdom  ;  which 
would  exclude  minifters  as  well  as  magiflrates:  from 


94 

Having  any  concern  with  it.  But  more  dire&ly  la 
anfv.er  to  this  obpftion,  it  may  be  oblerved,  thai 
Chnft  was  the  king  of  the  old  teftartient  church  as 
well  as  the  new.  He  was  then  fet  as  king  upon 
God's  holy  hill  Zion.  And  his  kingdom  was  no 
more  a  kingdom  of  this  world  under  the  former  dif- 
penfation,  than  under  the  preient.  Though  the ad- 
minifhation,  and  pofirive  ordinances,  and  modes  of 
worfiiip,  &c.  were  different,  yet  the  f  ffemial  nature,; 
and  grand  obj  Q  of  Chrift's  kingdom,  tinder  the 
old  k  (lament  difpenfaiionwere,  doubtlefs.  the  fome 
asunder  the  new.  Chrift's  kingdom,  therefore,  be- 
ing not  of  this  world,  affords  no  ftronger  argument 
agai.ift  the  right  and  duty  of  the  ci\  il  magifttate,  to 
fupport  religion  under  the  latter,  than  under  the 
former.  And  confequently,  as  it  is  evident  beyond 
all  reafonabie  controveify,  that  it  belonged  to  the 
office  and  doty  of  the  civil  magiftrate  under  the  olcl- 
teftament  difpenfation,  fo  it  does  under  the  new, 
notwithftanding  the  above  objection,  thai  Chrift's 
kingdom  is  not  of  this  world.  But  after  all,  it  is 
probable  that  fome  tender  confaenced  objectors 
may  ftili  infift  that  they  cannot  in  confeience  part 
with  their  money,  for  the  fupport  of  religion  or  the 
teachers  of  if,  in  obedience  to  the  civil  magiftrate. 
There  are  hardly  any  two  words  of  more  diflimilar 
Signification,  than  confeience  and  money  :  and  yet 
it  feems  they  are  fome  times  ufed  as  fynonimous 
terms.  Or  perhaps,  to  fpeak  more  correQly,  it  is 
to  be  feared,  that  perfons  often  miftake  that  inordi- 
nate love  of  money,  which  is  the  root  of  all  evil, 
and  which  renders  them  extremely  loth  to  part  with 
it5  for  the  fupport  of  religion,  for  a  confeientious 
fcruple  with  regard  of  the  lawfulnefs  of  fo  doing. 
One  reafon  affigned  by  certain  perfons,  why  they 
cannot  in  confeience  part  with  their  money  for  the 
fupport  of  religion,  in  complience  with  the  requifi- 
tion  of  the  civil  magiftrate,  is  that  the  money  is  like 
to  be  applied,  or  at  leaft  is  liable  to  be  applied  to  the 


»5 

fupport  of  a  religion,  or  form  of  worflrp,  whicra 
they  fuppofe  to  be  erroneous,  and  in  which  they  can- 
riot  in  confcience  join.  But  this  plea, Hit  be  of  any 
validity,  will  operate  againft  paying  any  taxes  what- 
soever, which  we  as  individuals  fuppofe  will,  or  may 
be  applied  to  any  purpofe  we  do  not  approve,  or 
think  to  be  wrong,  or  not  conducive  to  the  public 
good.  The  civil  magiftrate,  the  Apoftle  tel  Is,  is  a 
minifter  of  God  for  good,  and  that  we  are  bound  to 
be  fubje£t  not  only  for  wrath,  but  for  confcience 
fake  I  would  not  be  uno'crftood  to  fuppofe,  that 
this  declaration  of  the  Apoftle  canjuftly  be  alleged 
in  fup,»ort  of  the  doclrine  of  paffive  obedience,  and 
non-refiftance  ;  or  that  there  is  no  cafe  in  which  a 
perfon  may  be  under  confcientious  obligations  to 
withhold  obedience  to  the  requifitions  of  the  civil 
magiftrate,  Doubtlefs,  where  fuch  requifitions  run 
counter  to  the  plain  revealed  will  of  the  Deity,  the 
ru'e  is  exprefs,  that  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather 
than  man.  But  with  what  reafon  or  propriety  can 
this  rule  be  alleged  in  j unification  of  our  withhold- 
ing our  money  in  compliance  with  the  requifition 
of  a  lawful  magiftrate,  or  civil  government,  under  a 
pretence  that  fuch  a  demand  is  an  infringement  of 
the  rights  of  confcience  ?  as  where  do  we  find  that 
a  compliance  with  fuch  a  demand  would  be  to  coun- 
teracl:  the  plain  revealed  will  of  God  ?  On  the  con- 
trary, doth  not  our  Saviour's  exprefs  approbation 
of  paying  tribute  to  Caefar,  put  the  matter  beyoi.d 
all  reafonable  doubt  ?  lifpecially  if  it  be  confidered, 
that  there  was  flrong  reafon  to  apprehend  as  the 
money  was  paid  to  an  idolatrous  emperor,  it  would, 
at  leaft  in  part,  be  applied  to  the  fupport  of  an  idol- 
atrous religion  ? 

The  above  objections  are  all  that  I  recolle£i  Jo 
have  heard  advanced  againft  the  do&rine  I  under- 
took to  eftablifh  :  the  invalidity  of  which  I  humbly 
conceive  hath    been    fufliciently  manifested  in  the 


foregoing  obfervations,  and  consequently  the  truth 
of  the  pofuion  remains  Unfhaken. 

There  are  feveral  Corollaries  which  teem  natural- 
ly to  remit  from  the  pofition  I  have  endeavoured  to 
iupport,  which  I  conceive  require  fome  particular 
confideration.     As, 

i  ilr:  That  one  important  qualification  of  magis- 
trates or  civil  rulers,  is  that  they  fhouid  be  men  of 
religion.  Certainly,  if  it  is  an  important,  not  to  fay 
an  efTential  duty  of  their  office  to  patronize  and  fup- 
port  religion  by  their  authority*  and  thus  perform 
the  part  of  nurfing  fathers  to  the  church  ;  it  is  no 
lelV  their  duty  to  do  the  fame  by  their  example.  The 
former  without  the  latter,  will  commonly  be  but  to 
Very  little  purpofe.  Hence  the  fear  of  God,  a  phrafe 
frequently  made  ufe  of  in  fcripture$  to  exprefs  a  re- 
ligious character*  is  reprefented  by  the  Pfalmift,  as 
an  efTential  ingredient  in  the  chara&er  of  a  ruler. 
He  thatrulcth  over  men  mud  be  juft*  ruling  in  the 
fear  of  God.  Here  juftice  and  the  fear  of  God,  or 
a  devout  reverence  of  the  divine  majefty,  are  con- 
fidered  as  inseparably  connected;  and  it  is  intimated 
that  we  can  have  no  fecurity  for  the  juftice  of  a  rul- 
er's adminifiration,  who  is  deftitute  of  the  fear  of 
God.  Agreeably  hereto,  an  unjuft  judge  is  charac- 
ter! fed  by  our  Saviour  as  one  that  feared  not  God, 
and,  confequemly,  regarded  not  man.  The  fame 
qualification  Mofes  is  directed  by  his  father-in-law 
Jethro,  to  refpeel;  in  the  appointment  of  rulers  over 
the  Ifraelites,  no  doubt  under  divine  direction. 
Took  ye  out  from  among  all  the  people— Men  that 
fear  God,  Sec.  and  make  them  rulers  of  thoufand?, 
rulers  of  hundreds, rulers  of  fifties. and  rulers  of  tens. 
A  wicked  ruler  is  reprefented  in  the  facred  oracles  * 
great  judgment  upon  a  people,  and  as  a  token  of  di- 
vine difpieafure.  Hence,  fays  the  Moll  High,  with 
refpect  to  Saul,  I  gave  them  a  king  in  mine  anger. 
And  fays  Solomon,  as  a  roaring  lion,  and  ranging" 
bear,   fo  is  a  wicked  ruler.     And  again,  fays  he; 


*7 

when  the  righteous  are  in  authority,  the  people  re- 
joice, but  when  the  wicked  beareth  rule,  the  people 
mourn.  He  alfo  obferves,  that  a  king  fitting  upon 
the  throne  of  judgment,  fcattereth  iniquity  with  his 
eyes.  By  which  it  is  evident  he  means  a  good  king, 
one  who  is  a  terror  to  evil  dcers,  and  a  praife  and 
encouragement  to  them  that  do  well  ;  for  the  oppo- 
fne  cfF  6ts  are  afTcribcd  by  the  P fa!  mi  ft  to  the  influ- 
ence of  wicked  rulers,  viz.  that  it  gives  the  wicked 
courage  to  come  forth  out  of  their  lurking  places, 
and  fhow  them  e  ves  with  boldnefs  and  confidence, 
without  fear  or  fliame.  The  wicked  walk,  fays  he, 
on  every  fide,  when  the  vileft  men  are  exalted.  Un- 
der the  adminiftration  of  infidel  and  irreligious  rul- 
ers, men  of  fimilar  characters,  become  prime  favor- 
ites at  couit,  and  engrofs  the  honors  and  emoluments 
of  the  Rate,  and  are  the  only  men  who  {land  candi- 
dates for  polls  of  dignity  and  profit  in  the  govern- 
ment---In  which  cafe  nothing  can  be  expected,  but 
thit  infidelity,  and  immoralit),  and  all  thofe  vices, 
which  are  deflruftive  to  fociety,  will  come  in  like  a 
flood,  and  deluge  the  land,  and  involve  it  in  mifery 
and  ruin. 

Corol.  2d.  It  is  alfo  obvious  from  the  preced- 
ing obfervations,  as  a  genuine  conclufion  naturally 
flowing  therefrom,  that  it  is  the  duly  of  thole  who 
are  entrufled  with  the  appointment  of  rulers,  to  have 
a  refpect  to  the  religious  character  of  thofe  for  whom 
they  give  their  fufTrage.  To  fay  that  it  belongs  to 
the  office  and  duty  of  the  civil  rulers  to  patronize, 
and  fupport  religion,  and  confequently,  that  they 
•  ought  to  be  men  of  religion  themfelves;  and  vet  at 
the  fame  time  to  fay,  that  they  to  whom  it  belongs  to 
invert  them  with  their  official  character,  are  under 
no  obligation  to  have  a  regard  to  their  religious 
qualifications,  is  an  abfurdity,  and  little,  if  any  thing 
fhort  of  a  contradiction.  To  commit  the  molt  import- 
ant imereits  of  the  community,  as  well  as  our  own, 
bo;h  civil   and  religious,  into   the   hands  of  men, 

E 


28 

whom  we  have  no  reafon  to  apprehend,  have  the  feat 
of  God  before  'heir  eyes,  is  a  mod  irrational  and  pre- 
pofterous  as  well  as  criminal  piece  of  conduct  ;  a 
betraying  the  pub'ic  truft.  and  a  vile  proftituti«-n  of 
a  talent,  for  which  we  mult  give  an  account.  What 
fecurity  can  we  have,  that  infidels,  or  perfons  who 
have  no  regard  to  religion,  or  reverence  for  the  De- 
it}  ,  when  advanced  to  places  of  public  trtift,  will 
not  at  every  opportunity  facrifice  the  intertft  of 
their  conltituents,  to  their  own  private  priflions,  or 
emolument?  To  adniinifler  an  oath  of  fidelity  to 
perfons  of  the  above  difcription  would  be  perfectly 
nugatory,  not  to  fay  a  profanation.* 

*  As  an  illuftration  of  the  truth  and  propriety  of  the  preceding 
corollaries,  the  happy  i.  fluencc  which  fuch  a  principle  would  pro- 
bably have  upon  tbe  practice  of  duelling*  it  is  conceived,  may  per- 
tinently be  adduced.  How  low  in  the  fcale  of  degradation  muft 
the  ftatcof  fociety  be  reduced,  when  fuch  nefarious  crimes,  fuch  hor- 
jid  abominations  are  perpetrated  with  the  connivance,  and  implicit 
-approbation  of  public  authority  ;  and  become  fo  prevalent,  that  to 
fupport  the  character  of  a  gentlemin  and  a  man  of  honour,  and  avoid 
the  imputation  of  cowardice,  a  man  muft  diveft  himfelf  of  his  rea- 
fon, that  godlike  faculty,   by  which  principally  he  is  diftingoifhed 

>  from  the  brutes,  throw  away  that  life  which  is  the  only  fubftratuni 
of  all  enjoyment  of  a  temporal  nature,  counteract  the  dictates  of  his 

'  own  confeience,  and  bid  defiance  to  the  vengeance  of  the  Almighty  J 
A^as,  can  no  method*  no  expedient  be  devifed  to  expel  this  horrid 
monfter,  this  hidra,  this  gorgon,  this  complication  and  confumma- 
ti.n  of  irrationality,  barbarifm  and  impiety  from  this  land  of  boafted 
civilization,  and  refinement;  in  which  reafm  and  philofophy  are  fo 
ttiu  h  cultivated,  and  in  which  the  light  of  divine  revelation  ihinea 
in  is  meridian  fplendour !  Can  there  be  a  ftronger  demonfliation 
of  a  woeibl  degeneracy,  and  corruption  of  principle  and  morals  a- 
monglt  a  people  ;  or  that  the  whole  head  is  fick,  and  the  whole  heart 
faint,  and  that  the  whole  body  is  full  of  wounds  and  bruifes,  and  pu- 
trifying  fores  ?  In  point  of  rationality,  Empedocles,  who  to  obtain 
an  apotheofis  caft  himfelf  headlong  into  the  Earning  crarer  of  mount 
Etna,  hath  vaftly  the  preeminence  when  compared  with  him  who 
fights  a  duel  on  the  ufual  grounds.  .  For  the  former,  according  to 
the  doctrines  of  the  pagan  theology  in  which  he  had  been  educated, 
and  in  which  he  doubtlefs  firmly  believed,  expected  to  receive  an 
ample  compenlation  for  the  loft  of  his  temporal  life,  viz.  an  immor- 
tal and  exalted  felicity  in  the  future  world.  Whereas  the  u'tiwft 
that  the  dnelilt  can  expect  as  a  counter  balance  for  the  loft  of  his  life, 
and  his  foul,  is  to  eleape  the  jeers  and  feoffs  of  the  infidel,  and  un° 


*9 

From  whence  it  follows  as  a 
3d.  Corol.  That  it  belongs  to  the  duty  and  of- 
fice of  the  minifters,  or  public  teachers  of  religion, 
to  inculcate  thefe  duties,  and  make  tbem  the  occa- 
fional  fubjecls  of  their  public  preaching.  Itisdoubt- 
lefs  the  duty  of  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel  to  declare 
the  whole  counfel  of  God;  otherwife  they  could 
not  exonerate  themfelves  from  the  guilt  of  the  blood 
of  fouls.  The  Apoftle  Paul  declares  that  he  was 
pure  from  the  blood  of  .ill  men  ;  and  as  a  proof  of 
it,  obferves,  that  he  hud  not  manned  to  declare  the 
whole  counfel  of  Godi  Ac"ls  xx.  26,  27  But 
whatever  is  enjoined  in  the  facred  oracles  asa  duty 
incumbent  upon  any  man,  clafs  or  difcription  of 
men,  conftitutes  a  part  of  the  counfel  of  God. 
And,  conffquenty,  it  is  incumbent  upon  minifters 
of  the  gofpel  to  make  fuch  duties  occafionally,  the 
fubjecls  of  their  preaching,  as  thev  would  not  be 
guilty  of  fhunning  to  declare  the  whole  counfel  of 
God.  All  moral,  relative  and  focial  duties  are  to 
be  explained,  and  inculcated  bv  the  public  teachers 
of  religion  :  fuch  are  the  duties  of  hufbands  and 
wives,  parents  and  children, rulers  and  fttbjeels,  &c. 
And  one  clafs  of  thefc  duties  are  no  lefs  properly 
the  fubje&s  of  a  minifter's  preaching  than  an  other, 

principled  part  of  mankind,  which  may  properly  be  termed  the 
laughter  of  fools,  and  to  be  by  <uch  petfons  dubbed  a  man  of  c<  a 
A  noble  and  heroic  courage  !  The  courage  of  a  madman,  who 
trembles  at  (he  (baking  of  a  leaf,  a  mere  phantom,  an  ign^  tatnus, 
a  nonentity,  and  dafhes  out  his  brains  againft  a  wall,  and  bids  defi- 
ance to  that  almighty  Being  whom  to  fear  is  an  argument  of  the 
hi^heft  wifdom — and  whom  not  to  fear  is  an  evidence  of  the  mod 
ftupid  folly  and  madnefii  !  Which  fhews  the  van  importance  of  the 
fear  of  God,  or  a  principle  of  religion  as  a  qualification  of  a  ruler, 
and  alfo  of  a  confeiencious  regard  to  this  qualification  in  thofe  by 
whom  they  arc  inverted  wi*,h  their  cfTicial  character  ;  from  the  want 
of  which  principle  it  is  that  the  practice  of  duelling  derives  its  ori- 
gin ;  and  the  predominance  of  which  in  our  feveial  brancher,  or 
departments  of  government,  would  effectually  annihilate  this  enor- 
mi.y,  fo  vile  and  horrible  in  its  nature,  and  in  its  confequences  to 
fociety,  fo  fatal  and  pernicious. 


89 

for  they  all  equally  conftitute  a  part  of  the  counfel 
of  God  ;  being  particularly,  and  explicitly  enjoined 
and  inculcated  in  the  ficred  fcriptures.  One  char- 
after  under  which  minifters  of  the  gofpel  are  repre- 
sented,and  from  which  their  duty  may  be  inferred, 
is  that  of  watchmen,  lfai.  lii.  8.  Where  the  prophet 
fpeaking  of  the  promulgation  of  the  gofpel,  fays, 
thy  watchmen  Hull  lift  up  the  voice  &c.  And  Chap, 
ii.  6.  I  have  fet  watchmen  upon  thv  Wills,  O  Jeru- 
fulem,  who  (hall  not  hold  their  peace  day  nor  night. 
In  which  paffages,  it  is  evident  that  by  watchmen, 
the  minifters  of  the  gofpel  are  to  be  undei  flood. 
In  conformity  to  the  lame  reprefentation,  the  Apos- 
tle fpeaking  of  minifters,  fays,  they  watch  for  your 
fouls,  as  they  that  muft  give  an  account.  But  the 
office  and  duty  of  a  watchman,  every  one  knows,  is 
to  give  warning  of  an  approaching  enemy,  or  dan- 
ger. And,  coi  fcquently,  it  belongs  to  the  office  of 
minifters  of  the  gofpel  to  warn  their  people  of  thofe 
enemies  and  dangers,  with  regard  to  which  they  are 
ft\  led  watchmen.  Which,  indeed,  it  is  conceded  are 
fpiritua!  enemies  and  dangers,  or  which  endanger 
the  lofs  of  their  fpiritual,  or  religious  privileges,  and 
confequently,  their  falvation.  But  what  can  have  a 
more  direct  tendency  to  the  production  of  this  ef- 
ieft,  than  the  prevalence,  and  propagation  of  infidel- 
ity, immorality,  and  a  corruption  and  depravation 
of  manners  am?ngfta  people  ?  And  what  can  tend 
more  effectually  to  promote  thefe  effecls  than  the 
example  and  patronage  of  rulers  of  infidel,  and  ir- 
religious characters  among  them;  under  whofe  in* 
fluence  and  connivance,  infidelity,  and  impiety  nauy 
iialk  in  open  day-light,  without  a  mafk  or  difguile, 
fjiame  or  remorfe  ?  This  being  the  cafe,  it  muft 
furelv  be  an  important  part  of  the  duty  of  the  minis- 
ters of  the  gofpel,  whom  God  hath  fet  as  watchmen, 
upon  the  walls  of  jerufalem,  to  warn  their  people  of 
the  dangerous,  and  fatal  confequences,  refukin^ 
from  the  election  of  men  of  the  above  <fifcrtption,for 


3i 

. 

rulers  over  them,  and  the  confequent  obligation  in* 
cumbent  on  electors  to  pay  a  ftrift,  and  confcien- 
tious  attention  to  the  oppofite  qualifications  of  thofe, 
for  whom  they  give  their  fuftrage.  The  fame  ir.fer- 
ence  is  equally  deducible  from  another  character  un- 
der which  minifters  of  the  gofpel  are  defignated,  viz. 
that  of  pallors  or  (hepherds,  a  part  of  whofe  office 
it  is  to  defend  the  fl>ck  from  the  ravages  of  wolves, 
and  other  beafts  of  prey. 

F»om  which  it  follows  as  a 
4th  Corol.  That  the  cenfures  pafT-d  upon  mini- 
fters bv  many  at  the  prefent  day,  for  occafionally 
making  fome  of  thefe  duties  the  fubjecls  of  their 
preaching;  ftigmati/.ing  them  ?.s  political  preachersj 
&c.  is  very  unreafonable  and  injurious.  If  for  mi- 
nifters to  make  the  duties  and  qualifications  of  rulers 
and  fubjefts,  and  particularly  of  c'cclors,  the  occa- 
fional  fu  ejects  of  their  preaching,  is  to  preach  pol  - 
tics,  then  I  fcruple  not  to  fay,  that  it  is  no  wife  out 
of  character  for  a  minifter  to  preach  politics.  Nay, 
it  is  an  efiential  part  of  the  duty  of  his  function  to 
pteach  politics;  and  which  he  cannot  neglect  but  at 
the  peril  of  fhunning  to  declare  the  whole  counfel 
of  God;  for  the  bible  is  full  of  fjch  politics.  Preach- 
ing politics,  or  political  preaching  feem  to  be  ph rales 
of  ominous  import,  or  cant  phrafes  defigned  to  fix  a 
ftigma  upon  the  clergv,  or  to  poffefs  the  minds  of 
the  more  illiterate  and  uridifcerninp,  with  an  idea 
that  minifters  have  abandoned  the  appropriate  duties 
of  their  function,  and  combined  in  a  machivailian 
plot  to  lupport  one  political  party  merely  as  fuch, 
in  oppofition  to  another.  Whereas,  was  the  truth 
properly  Rated  and  apprehended,  the  phantom  would 
vanifh,  and  it  would  appear,  that  the  grievous  cry 
againft  the  clergy  for  preaching  politics,  amounted 
to  no  more,  than  that  on  certain  fpecial  occafions, 
they  explained  and  inculcated  the  duie<  and  quali- 
fications of  rulers,  as  delineated  in  the  facred  fcrip- 
turesj  viz.  Thai  they  fhould  be  men  friendly  to  re- 


3* 

ligton;  men  that  fear  God  and  hate  covetoufnefs  ; 
and  that  electors  ought  to  have  a  refpect  to  thefe 
qualifications  in  the  perfons  whom  they  deftgnate  to 
peaces  of  rule  and  authority  in  the  government. 
Which  every  pcrfon  tolerably  acquainted  with  the- 
bible  knows  to  be  an  important  part  of  minifterial 
dutv.# 

The  inculcation  of  the  duty  of  fubjefts  towards 
tbeir  rulers,  is  exprefsly  enjoined  upon  anuii&eri  as 
a  part  of  their  official  duty.  Put  them  in  mind  (fays 
the  Apoftle  to  Titus,  a  minifter  of  the  gofpel)  to  be 
fubjeQ:  to  principalities  and  powers,  and  to  obey 
magiftrates.  Tit.  iii.  i,  But  the  duties  of  fubjecls 
and  rulers  are  reciprocal ;  and  confequently  an  ex- 
planation, and  inculcation  of  the  one,  naturally  in- 
volves the  other.  Hence  the  Apoftle  in  his  epiiile 
to  the  Romans,  chap;  xiii.  at  the  beginning,  after 
enjoining  upon  them  the  duty  of  fubjeclion  to  rulers* 
or  the  higher  powers,  as  an  ordinance  of  God,  adds 
as  a  further  reafon  for  this  fubje&ion,  that  rulers  are 
Dot  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil,  aid  that 
they  are  minifters  of  God  for  good,  that  is  to  the 
people  ;  and  that  for  this  caufe  they  paid  tribute, 
becaufe  they  (rulers)  were  God's  minifters  attending 
continually  upon   this  very  thing,  viz.   the   public 

*  Perhaps  the  real  ground  of  the  grievous  accufafions  apainft  the 
clergy,  which  are  exhibited  by  many  at  the  prefent  day  ,  for  preach- 
ing what  thev  call  politics,  may  not  be  their  limply  explaining  and 
inculcating  the  duties  and  qualifications  of  civil  ruieis,  and  thofe  of 
electors,  but  ra'.her  the  particular  fentiment*  reUiive  to  thofe  fub- 
jecls which  thev  endeavor  to  imprefs  upon  the  mines  of  their  hear- 
ers.— Should  minifters  adopt  the  other  fide  of  the  queriion,  and  bold- 
Jy  affert  and  maintain  from  the  defk,  that  civil  government  has 
nothing  to  do  in  matters  of  religion  ;  and  that  eleclois  are  under  no 
obligations  to  refpett  the  religiou.'  characters  and  qualifications  of 
thofe  whom  they  elect  to  places  of  power  and  trufl  in  the  govern- 
ment ;  thai  it  is  a  matter  of  perfect  indifference  to  fociety  uhether 
their  rulers  believe  in  one  God,  in  twenty  Gods,  or  no  God  ;  it 
may  be  queried,  whether  they  might  not  probably  efcape  thofe  fe- 
vere  cenfurei,  and  that  volley  of  calumnies  which  are  fo  liberally 
bHroyed  upon  them  by  a  certain  clafs  of  men  for  preaching  poli- 
tics i 


33 

good.  Which  is  not  to  be  underftood  as  a  decli- 
nation that  this  dc  faHo  is  the  real  character  of  *H 
fuch  as  fuftain  the  nominal  office  or  occupy  the  place 
of  rulers;  and  that  unconditional,  and  implicit  obe- 
dience is  to  be  paid  them  accordingly.  For  this 
would  be  to  revive  the  antiquated  and  exploded 
doctrine  of  paffive  obedience  and  non  refiftance,  to 
which  it  is  pre  fumed,  they  who  are  fo  clamorous 
agair.ft  minilters  for  preaching  politics  at  the  prefent 
day  would  be  among  the  laft  to  fubferibe.  But 
thefe  reprefentations,  are  doubtlcfs  to  be  underftood 
as  defcriptive  of  what  rulers  ought  to  be,  rather  thao 
as  a  declaration  of  what  they  really  are.  And  con- 
fequently  when  minifters  undertake  in  obedience  to 
the  apoftolic  injunction,  to  put  people  in  mind  to 
be  fubjecl  to  principalities  and  powers,  and  to  obey 
magiftrates,  the  character  of  rulers,  or  magiftrates, 
naturally  comes  into  view  as  a  fubjeft  of  difcuftion; 
and  alfo,  the  nature  and  extent  of  that  fubjeriion 
and  obedience  which  is  their  due,  together  with  the 
ground  and  reafon  of  it,  viz.  their  being  minifters 
of  God  for  good  to  the  people  over  whom  they  pre- 
fide.  But  this  is  that  preaching  politics  which  ren- 
ders minifters  fo  much  the  objects  of  obloquy  from 
certain  perfons  at  the  prefent  day.  On  the  whole, 
from  the  preceding  obfervations,  and  particularly 
from  the  pafTages  of  fcripture  which  have  been  ad- 
duced, I  conceive  it  muft  be  very  manifeft,  that 
were  minifters  to  be  debarred  preaching  upon  thofe 
fubje£ls  which  are  ftigmatized  by  many  under  the 
obnoxious  epithet  of  politics,  or  which  are  con6- 
dered  as  political  fubjecls,  a  great  portion  of  fcrip- 
ture would  be  excluded,  and  condemned,  as  con- 
taining improper  matter  for  minifters  to  make  the 
fuhjecls  of  their  preaching.  The  confequence  of 
which  nypothefis  would  be,  'hat  minifters  ought  not 
to  declare  the  whole  counfel  of  God.  But  frosn 
this  judgment  the  appeal  of  the  Apoftle  Peter,  in  a 
cafe  not  very  diflimilarj  I  conceive,  may  not  imper- 


34 


tiherttly  be  adopted-— Whether  it  be  right  in  the 
fighi  of  God,  to  hearken  unto  you  more  than  unto 
God— -judge  );e» 


